尤尔根·罗迪的法律逻辑

IF 0.1 0 PHILOSOPHY
M. Mauer
{"title":"尤尔根·罗迪的法律逻辑","authors":"M. Mauer","doi":"10.25162/ARSP-2020-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper looks into the writings of Jurgen Rodig (1942–1975) on legal logic with the aim of identifying those results which still appear to be essential contributions to legal theory. Of particular relevance are (i) the reasons why propositional and predicate logic in its classsical form should be considered adequate and by and large sufficient to represent formal legal reasoning. Other issues discussed in this paper are (ii) Rodig’s views concerning specifically legal variants of logical arguments, (iii) the axiomatic method in legal theory, (iv) ways of substantiating general norms as a central step in what constitutes the legal syllogism, (v) the correct method of interpreting written law, (vi) the question as to whether there are formal characteristics of general norms, and (vii) structural properties of legal definitions and of similar legislative drafting tools.","PeriodicalId":41477,"journal":{"name":"Archiv fur Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Jürgen Rödigs juristische Logik\",\"authors\":\"M. Mauer\",\"doi\":\"10.25162/ARSP-2020-0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper looks into the writings of Jurgen Rodig (1942–1975) on legal logic with the aim of identifying those results which still appear to be essential contributions to legal theory. Of particular relevance are (i) the reasons why propositional and predicate logic in its classsical form should be considered adequate and by and large sufficient to represent formal legal reasoning. Other issues discussed in this paper are (ii) Rodig’s views concerning specifically legal variants of logical arguments, (iii) the axiomatic method in legal theory, (iv) ways of substantiating general norms as a central step in what constitutes the legal syllogism, (v) the correct method of interpreting written law, (vi) the question as to whether there are formal characteristics of general norms, and (vii) structural properties of legal definitions and of similar legislative drafting tools.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41477,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archiv fur Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archiv fur Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25162/ARSP-2020-0007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archiv fur Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25162/ARSP-2020-0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文研究Jurgen Rodig(1942-1975)关于法律逻辑的著作,目的是找出那些对法律理论仍有重要贡献的成果。特别相关的是(i)为什么经典形式的命题和谓词逻辑应该被认为是充分的,并且总的来说足以代表形式的法律推理的原因。本文讨论的其他问题是(ii)罗迪格关于逻辑论证的具体法律变体的观点,(iii)法律理论中的公理方法,(iv)将一般规范作为构成法律三段论的中心步骤的方法,(v)解释成文法的正确方法,(vi)关于一般规范是否存在形式特征的问题,以及(vii)法律定义和类似立法起草工具的结构特性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Jürgen Rödigs juristische Logik
This paper looks into the writings of Jurgen Rodig (1942–1975) on legal logic with the aim of identifying those results which still appear to be essential contributions to legal theory. Of particular relevance are (i) the reasons why propositional and predicate logic in its classsical form should be considered adequate and by and large sufficient to represent formal legal reasoning. Other issues discussed in this paper are (ii) Rodig’s views concerning specifically legal variants of logical arguments, (iii) the axiomatic method in legal theory, (iv) ways of substantiating general norms as a central step in what constitutes the legal syllogism, (v) the correct method of interpreting written law, (vi) the question as to whether there are formal characteristics of general norms, and (vii) structural properties of legal definitions and of similar legislative drafting tools.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信